MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143985241 · doi:10.1109/nafips.2004.1336252

Rough set approximations in formal concept analysis

2004· article· en· W2143985241 on OpenAlexafffund
Yiyu Yao, Yaohua Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Annual Meeting of the Fuzzy Information, 2004. Processing NAFIPS '04. · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersSpecialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRough setFormal concept analysisSet (abstract data type)Approximations of πComputer scienceUniversal setMathematicsSet theoryDominance-based rough set approachApproximation theoryLattice (music)Algebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematicsTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceApplied mathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An important topic of rough set theory is the approximation of undefinable sets or concepts through definable sets. It involves the construction of a system of definable sets and the definition of approximation operators. In this paper, the notion of rough set approximations is introduced into formal concept analysis. Approximation operators are defined based on both lattice-theoretic and set-theoretic operators. The results provide a better understanding of data analysis using rough set theory and formal concept analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Annual Meeting of the Fuzzy Information, 2004. Processing NAFIPS '04.Same topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207